The United Nations Human Rights Council for the first time ever formulated a report on human rights violation in Kashmir. The report goes into detail about the human rights violations and abuses which have taken place in indian state of Jammu and Kashmir and the Pakistan occupied Kashmir. The allegations against India runs to 40 pages whereas the allegations against Pakistan add up to only nine pages. This report has firmly been rejected by India. The spokesperson of the ministry of external affairs called the report “fallacious, tendentious and motivated. We question the intent in bringing out such a report.”

Urgent need to address #HumanRights violations & abuses and deliver justice for all people in #Kashmir, who have suffered a conflict that has claimed or ruined numerous lives for 70 years – New @UNHumanRights report: https://t.co/8SeQ9tlhZU pic.twitter.com/meQuL3sQ4J

— UN Human Rights (@UNHumanRights) June 14, 2018

Although it is obvious that the publication of the report had an ulterior motive of defaming India, there are some points which were clearly coloured to suit its narrative. Below are some of the examples which will highlight the claim made above. The facts put out in this story is taken from the sources cited by the report.

The 25^th point of the report accuses the Jammu and Kashmir government of giving two different figures of the number of people affected in the 2016 unrest and cited the source as the questions in the parliament of the state assembly. But in reality, the figures were for 2 different happenings. the first figure gives the answer to how many people were killed in the 2016 unrest and doesn’t take into account as to how the person died. The second figure states how many people were killed in stone pelting only during the 2016 unrest. Therefore, the report tries to bring down the credibility of the state government by accusing it of changing facts.

The 44^th point in the report states that the union government rejected prosecution of 47 soldiers but does not state the fact that there was no evidence to substantiate the alleged crimes of the armed forces.

This is a clear example which shows that only half-truths are published in the report and that it does not state the whole fact.

In the 55^th point, the report states that the army carried out extrajudicial killings of three civilians but doesn’t consider the army’s point of view which was that the civilians were wearing pathans which are normally worn by infiltrators. Moreover, the civilians were located close to the LoC at night and they carried arms. At this juncture, it can be questioned whether they were civilians or not.

In the 66^th point, the report accuses India of keeping people in detention for years and cites the example of a separatist Hurriyat leader Masrat Alam. India should not feel obliged to justify the detention of a separatist leader who is a threat to internal security.

Point 78 of the report forgets to state that one of the civilian who was killed by the forces was located in a house where six militants were hiding and taking shelter.

We can thus see how the report reveals or does not reveal certain facts as per its convenience. It also is not surprising to learn that the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights was seen with separatist leaders from Pakistan. A think tank of Europe has also raised objections to this biased report. The chief of Army staff, Bipin Rawat has called the report “motivated”. India at UNGA has firmly stated that no amount of “empty rhetoric” by Pakistan would change the fact that Kashmir is an integral part of India.

At the same time, the UN High Comissioner for Human Rights Council Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein called India's reaction disappointing and puzzling (source). The displaced pandits are reportedly countering the report by coming up which documents the plight of the minority community whcih was driven out from their homeland.